Q. Did you make any provisions to have somebody else
follow through with what you had indicated to
Bishop Daily was urgent and to follow through?

A. The person who assumed the responsibility of
Bishop Daily as my, my first associate was then
Father Robert Banks.

Q. And Father Banks is now a Bishop; is that
correct?

A. He is.

Q. And he's the Bishop of Green Bay?

A. Green Bay.

Q. So did you follow through on Mrs. Gallant's
letter with Bishop Banks?

A. Bishop Banks would have been the person who would
have handled such cases, that's correct, as
Bishop Daily, Father -- well, Bishop Banks.

Q. And would you have expected Bishop Banks to have
pulled the file on the priest that was alleged to
have molested boys?

A. I would have expected him to have handled the
case appropriately.

Q. What would have been the practice that you would
have expected him to do at that time?

A. I had confidence in both Bishop Daily and Bishop
Banks. As the note indicates here to Bishop
Daily, I said, "Urgent, please follow through."
And the "Please follow through" was an indication
that I want you to handle this in an appropriate
way. And I had confidence in those whom I
appointed to these roles to do that. I had
confidence in Bishop Daily and I had confidence
in Bishop Banks, as I still do.

Q. But Bishop Daily was leaving about the same time
you were sending him this letter; isn't that
correct? September of 1984 he was leaving the
Diocese of Boston?

A. Well, but he was still -- he held the
responsibility. I would not have addressed
something to him if he didn't have that
responsibility. If Bishop Banks had it at that
time, I would have addressed it to Bishop Banks.
What I'm saying is Bishop Banks succeeded Bishop
Daily.

Q. But did Bishop Daily leave within a week or two
weeks of that date?

A. I can't -- I don't have recall on those dates.

Q. Do you recall if you asked Bishop Banks to follow
up with what Bishop Daily had been doing, then
Father Banks, to follow up?

A. I cannot recall having told him, follow up on
this case. But I'm certain that --

Q. What would be --

A. -- it would have been expected that he would have
followed up on all current cases.

Q. What was the practice --

A. When I say cases, again, I'm not indicating that
this was one of many such cases, but it was not,
but what -- he would follow up on the business
that Bishop Daily had had.

Q. In 1984, you knew, did you not, that it would
have been wrong for a priest to have sexually
molested boys; is that correct?

A. Oh, absolutely.

Q. Okay. And that is something you would have tried
to stop from happening again?

A. That's correct.

Q. Okay. What was the practice that you had in
place in 1984 when you were Archbishop to deal
with this kind of allegation when it comes in?

A. I viewed this as a pathology, as a psychological
pathology, as an illness. Obviously I viewed it
as something that had a moral component. It was,
objectively speaking, a gravely sinful act. And
that's something that one deals with in one's
life, in one's relationship to God. But I also
viewed this as a pathology, as an illness, and so
consequently, I, not being an expert in this
pathology, not being a psychiatrist, not being a
psychologist, my, my modus operandi was to rely
upon those whom I considered and would have
reason to consider to have an expertise that I
lacked in assessing this pathology, in assessing
what it is that this person could safely do or
not do.

Q. So in -- you would have relied on some sort of
medical or psychiatric expertise in dealing with
this issue --

A. That's correct.

Q. -- at that time?

A. At that time, that's correct.

Q. And you would have expected, whether it was
Bishop Daily or Bishop Banks, to refer to that?

A. That's correct.

Q. Okay. And to assist these experts, would you
have wanted to give them as much information as
you had about a particular priest with a problem
as possible so they could have an accurate
opinion?

A. My presumption would be yes, that one, if a
person was going to assist, one would have to
provide the information that's pertinent for that
to be able to describe the degree of illness.

Q. Did you explain this as, your reliance on this
kind of expertise, to Bishop Daily, that you
expected him to go through this process?

A. I don't recall explaining it to him, but
certainly that would have been, I think, the
common expectation that we both would have shared
in what I, what I implied when I said, "Follow
through on this."

Q. So you, at that time, you don't recall requesting
to personally see the file of Father John J.
Geoghan?

A. That's -- I do not -- I did not do that.

Q. Okay.

A. I relied on those who assisted me in this matter
to do all that was appropriate, and that would
include....

Q. So the procedures you had in place then would
have been for this priest to have been sent to a
doctor?

A. That's correct.

Q. Okay.

MR. GORDON: Can we have this marked
as Exhibit 226, please?
(Document marked as Exhibit 226
for identification.)
(Document exhibited to witness.)

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

BY MR. GORDON:

Q. Cardinal, you've been given what has been marked
as Exhibit 226, the first page of which appears
to be a letter from the Archbishop's Residence of
September 18, 1984, the second document appears
to be a handwritten letter from St. Brendan's
Rectory addressed to Father Oates of September
27, 1984, which would -- on the second page of
which appears to be a copy of the signature of
John J. Geoghan, and the last page of which
appears to be a phone message.
Have you had a chance to review
Exhibit 226?

A. I have.

Q. And does Exhibit 226 indicate to you that Bishop
Banks on September 18 was then vicar general and
serving in place of Bishop Daily?

A. It does.

Q. Okay. So sometime between your note on the
envelope from, of the September 6, 1984 letter
from Marge Gallant, to September 18, Bishop Banks
assumed the duties of Bishop Daily?

A. That's correct.

Q. Okay. And does the first page of Exhibit 26
(sic) indicate that you had ended Father
Geoghan's assignment as St. Brendan's as of
September 18?

A. Yes.

Q. And was it your practice at that time, when
Bishop Banks was vicar general, to require
priests who were having their assignment changed
to notify Bishop, then Father Banks, now Bishop
Banks, and Father Oates, that they had received a
letter from you?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Do you remember if you in fact signed the
September 18 letter?

A. I, I do not recall signing the letter.

Q. But it would have been the kind of letter you
would have signed at the time?

A. But if the letter went at the time, it would have
had to have had my signature and nobody else
would be authorized to sign in my place.

Q. Okay. And the September 27 letter, which is the
second letter in there, indicates that Father
Geoghan in fact had received your letter of
September 18; is that correct?

A. That's what it indicates.

Q. Okay. And the last page to this exhibit appears
to be a copy of a phone message to Father Oates
from Father Geoghan?

A. That's what it appears to be.

Q. Okay. Does it appear to say something about St.
Julia's Rectory, he has spoken to his doctor, who
is sending a letter to affirm his good health?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. So there is in the record, in the file,
that phone message, what appears to be a phone
message from Father Oates to Father Geoghan?

A. Yes. Which I'm seeing here for the first time.

Q. Okay. So you hadn't seen that before?

A. No.

MR. GORDON: Could we have this marked
as Exhibit 227, please?

(Document marked as Exhibit 227
for identification.)

(Document exhibited to witness.)

Q. Cardinal, we've given you a two-page document
which has been marked as Exhibit 27 (sic). It
appears to have handwritten notes on it. On the
first page it appears to have the date of
9/17/84, re: Father John Geoghan. The second
page of which appear to be some notes and a copy
of that envelope in which you wrote urgent to
Bishop Daily in the Marge Gallant letter.
Have you seen these notes before?

A. No. And I find them rather difficult to read,
but I'll give a try here.

Q. Before you do that: Have you seen them before?

A. No.

Q. Okay. Do you know whose handwriting they are?

A. I do not.

Q. Have you ever spoken with Father James Lane?

A. Yes, I've spoken to Father Lane.

Q. Did you ever speak with Father Lane about Father
Geoghan?

A. I believe that, not in this time frame, but
subsequently I think he may have mentioned
something about him.

Q. And when was that?

A. I couldn't say.

Q. Was it in the 1980s?

A. Possibly. I can't -- I really can't put a time
from. Just in my apperceptive mass there's
something there, but it would not have been in
this early time frame.

Q. So it wouldn't have been contemporaneous with
1984?

A. It would not have been, no.

Q. If this helps you, would it have been before or
after you issued the sexual abuse policy?

A. I think it would be after.

Q. Okay. And do you remember what Father Lane said
to you about Father Geoghan?

A. I can't. I cannot remember.

Q. All right. Did anybody report to you that Father
Lane had some serious concerns about Father
Geoghan being at St. Brendan's?

MR. ROGERS: At this time or at any
time?

Q. In 1984.

A. No, no, no.

Q. And you don't know if the handwriting in the
9/17/84 notes are either Bishop Banks' or Bishop
Daily's; is that correct?

A. I really don't. I would, I would be more
familiar with Bishop Banks' handwriting, and this
does not appear to me to be Bishop Banks'
handwriting, it's usually smaller than that, but
I really don't know.

MR. GORDON: The envelope appears to
be obstructing the bottom of the notes. Could we
get a copy -- this is to counsel. There may be a
name signed at the bottom of this, we have not
received this. The second page is obstructed by
a copy of the envelope.

MR. ROGERS, III: We'll go back.

MR. GORDON: I suspect it's Bishop
Daily and I can't testify to that and the
Cardinal doesn't know.

Q. Do you remember a conversation with Bishop Banks
about terminating Father Geoghan at St. Brendan's
in 1984?

A. I do not recall a conversation with him on that
issue. It would have been a customary thing,
though, for a discussion to have taken place.

Q. And if there had been reports of Father Geoghan
having inappropriate contact with children in the
discussion of the termination of his assignment,
would Father Banks have reported to you at the
time there were these issues?